Health-Oriented Environmental Categories, Individual Health Environments, and the Concept of Environment in Public Health.

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Health Care Analysis Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-29 DOI:10.1007/s10728-023-00477-5
Annette K F Malsch, Anton Killin, Marie I Kaiser
{"title":"Health-Oriented Environmental Categories, Individual Health Environments, and the Concept of Environment in Public Health.","authors":"Annette K F Malsch, Anton Killin, Marie I Kaiser","doi":"10.1007/s10728-023-00477-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The term 'environment' is not uniformly defined in the public health sciences, which causes crucial inconsistencies in research, health policy, and practice. As we shall indicate, this is somewhat entangled with diverging pathogenic and salutogenic perspectives (research and policy priorities) concerning environmental health. We emphasise two distinct concepts of environment in use by the World Health Organisation. One significant way these concepts differ concerns whether the social environment is included. Divergence on this matter has profound consequences for the understanding of health and disease, for measures derived from that understanding targeting health promotion and disease prevention, and consequently, for epistemic structures and concept development in scientific practice. We hope to improve the given situation in public health by uncovering these differences and by developing a fruitful way of thinking about environment. Firstly, we side with the salutogenic conception of environment as a health resource (as well as a source of health risks). Secondly, we subdivide the concept of environment into four health-oriented environmental categories (viz., natural, built-material, socio-cultural, and psychosocial) and we link these with other theoretical notions proposed in the health sciences literature. Thirdly, we propose that in public health 'environment' should be understood as consisting of all extrinsic factors that influence or are influenced by the health, well-being, and development of an individual. Consequently, none of the four categories should be excluded from the concept of environment. We point out the practical relevance and fruitfulness of the conception of environment as a health source and frame this in causal terms, representing individual health environments as causal networks. Throughout, we side with the view that for the design of human health-promoting settings, increased attention and consideration of environmental resources of salutogenic potential is particularly pressing.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"141-164"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11133169/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-023-00477-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The term 'environment' is not uniformly defined in the public health sciences, which causes crucial inconsistencies in research, health policy, and practice. As we shall indicate, this is somewhat entangled with diverging pathogenic and salutogenic perspectives (research and policy priorities) concerning environmental health. We emphasise two distinct concepts of environment in use by the World Health Organisation. One significant way these concepts differ concerns whether the social environment is included. Divergence on this matter has profound consequences for the understanding of health and disease, for measures derived from that understanding targeting health promotion and disease prevention, and consequently, for epistemic structures and concept development in scientific practice. We hope to improve the given situation in public health by uncovering these differences and by developing a fruitful way of thinking about environment. Firstly, we side with the salutogenic conception of environment as a health resource (as well as a source of health risks). Secondly, we subdivide the concept of environment into four health-oriented environmental categories (viz., natural, built-material, socio-cultural, and psychosocial) and we link these with other theoretical notions proposed in the health sciences literature. Thirdly, we propose that in public health 'environment' should be understood as consisting of all extrinsic factors that influence or are influenced by the health, well-being, and development of an individual. Consequently, none of the four categories should be excluded from the concept of environment. We point out the practical relevance and fruitfulness of the conception of environment as a health source and frame this in causal terms, representing individual health environments as causal networks. Throughout, we side with the view that for the design of human health-promoting settings, increased attention and consideration of environmental resources of salutogenic potential is particularly pressing.

Abstract Image

以健康为导向的环境类别、个人健康环境和公共卫生中的环境概念。
环境 "一词在公共卫生科学中的定义并不统一,这导致了研究、卫生政策和实践中的严重不一致。正如我们将要指出的,这在某种程度上与有关环境健康的致病和致救观点(研究和政策优先事项)的分歧纠缠在一起。我们强调世界卫生组织使用的两种不同的环境概念。这些概念的一个重要区别在于是否包括社会环境。在这一问题上的分歧对健康和疾病的理解、对从这种理解中得出的以促进健康和预防疾病为目标的措施,进而对科学实践中的认识结构和概念发展都有深远的影响。我们希望通过揭示这些分歧和发展一种富有成效的环境思维方式来改善公共卫生领域的现状。首先,我们支持将环境作为一种健康资源(以及健康风险的来源)的有益概念。其次,我们将环境概念细分为四个以健康为导向的环境类别(即自然、物质建筑、社会文化和社会心理),并将这些类别与健康科学文献中提出的其他理论概念联系起来。第三,我们提出,在公共卫生领域,"环境 "应被理解为包括所有影响或被影响个人健康、福祉和发展的外在因素。因此,这四个类别中的任何一个都不应排除在环境概念之外。我们指出了环境作为健康来源这一概念的现实意义和丰硕成果,并以因果关系为框架,将个体健康环境表述为因果网络。我们始终认为,在设计促进人类健康的环境时,更多地关注和考虑具有促进健康潜力的环境资源尤为迫切。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信